similar to: [Bug 10182] New: Deleted file not shown in logfile (--log-file) unless out-format option is specified

--- silk/NSQ.c | 18 ++------------- silk/NSQ.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++ silk/arm/NSQ_neon.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ silk/arm/NSQ_neon.h | 10 ++++++++ 4 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/silk/NSQ.c b/silk/NSQ.c index d8513dc..ec81f3b 100644 --- a/silk/NSQ.c +++ b/silk/NSQ.c @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ void

--- silk/NSQ.c | 18 ++------------- silk/NSQ.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++ silk/arm/NSQ_neon.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ silk/arm/NSQ_neon.h | 10 ++++++++ 4 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/silk/NSQ.c b/silk/NSQ.c index d8513dc..ec81f3b 100644 --- a/silk/NSQ.c +++ b/silk/NSQ.c @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ void

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> wrote: >> Can you explain why you chose the approach of using a new pass? >> I pictured removing LegalizeDAG's type legalization code would >> mostly consist of finding all the places that use TLI.getTypeAction

Hello! I am merging two datasets and I have encountered a problem with sort. Can someone please point me to my error. Here is the example. ## I have dataframes, first one with factor and second one with factor ## and integer > tmp1 <- data.frame(col1 = factor(c("A", "A", "C", "C", "0", "0"))) > tmp2 <- data.frame(col1 =

Dear all, The function f() below is a function of m1 and m2, both of which are matrices with 3 rows. The function works sequentially one row after another. So altogether there are three stages. I am trying to update the coding to write a generic function that will work for arbitrary k stages. I am hoping to get some suggestion and help. Thanks so much! Hanna ##x, y are two

Le 31/05/2017 ? 17:30, Serguei Sokol a ?crit : > > More thorough reading revealed that I have overlooked this phrase in the > line's doc: "left and right /thirds/ of the data" (emphasis is mine). Oops. I have read the first ref returned by google and it happened to be tibco's doc, not the R's one. The layout is very similar hence my mistake. The latter does not

Hi R-users, I'm quite new to R and trying to learn the basics. I have a following problem concerning the convertion of array object into data frame. I have made following data sets tmp1 <- rnorm(100) tmp2 <- gl(10,2,length=100) tmp3 <- as.data.frame(cbind(tmp1,tmp2)) tmp3.sum <- tapply(tmp3$tmp1,tmp3$tmp2,sum) tmp3.sum <- as.data.frame(tapply(tmp1,tmp2,sum)) and I want the

I'm attempting to modify a parser generator to emit LLVM code instead of C. So far the experience has been trivial, but I am now running into an error regarding labels that I can't seem to solve. Situation 1: A label is used immediately after a void function call (l6 in this case): <snip> %tmp26 = load i32* @yybegin, align 4 %tmp27 = load i32* @yyend, align 4 call void

Hello everybody, unfortunately, I have some problems using the LLVM assembler parser ... - use llvm-gcc ( llvm-gcc -O0 -S --emit-llvm -o system2.ll system2.c) to translate the following small example into LLVM assembly language: int common_func1() { return 5; } int common_func2(int a) { return a + 5; } void Handler1() { int e = 4; int f = common_func1(); int ret = common_func2(e);

Hello, we've run a coverity scan on the openssh sources and it found several issues. Although the scan was run on patched rhel sources, some results are applicable to vanilla sources too. * servconf.c:1458:dead_error_line ? Execution cannot reach this statement "*intptr = *intptr + 1;" --- a/servconf.c +++ b/servconf.c @@ -1451,12 +1451,8 @@

On Jul 3, 2008, at 3:07 PM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> >> This seems to break the convention. It should be the responsibility >> of the caller to further legalize the results. >> >> Evan > That makes sense. In that case I believe > SelectionDAGLegalize::LegalizeSetCCOperands > should be legalizing the result. The description of this function > says

Evan Cheng wrote: > On Jul 3, 2008, at 3:07 PM, Richard Osborne wrote: > >>> This seems to break the convention. It should be the responsibility >>> of the caller to further legalize the results. >>> >>> Evan >>> >> That makes sense. In that case I believe >> SelectionDAGLegalize::LegalizeSetCCOperands >> should be

# Your mailer is set to "none" (default on Windows), # hence we cannot send the bug report directly from R. # Please copy the bug report (after finishing it) to # your favorite email program and send it to # # r-bugs@r-project.org # ###################################################### Is this intended behavior for the read.fwf(na.strings="-999")? I anticipated that

Suppose I have a data frame, such as the one below: tmp <- data.frame(index = gl(2,20), foo = rnorm(40)) And further assume it is sorted by index and then by the variable foo. tmp <- tmp[order(tmp$index, tmp$foo) , ] Now, I want to grab the first N rows of tmp for each index. In the end, what I want is the data frame 'result' tmp1 <- subset(tmp, index == 1) tmp2 <-

Hi, I am using various LLVM optimization passes and I noticed a strange behaviour in Mem2Reg Optimization. These pass is used for SSA construction and basically removed alloca of the corresponding pointers are just used in load/stores. I tried the following .ll file *define i32 @test(i32 %y,i32 %z) { entry: %X = alloca i32 ; type of %X is i32*. %X.0 = add i32 %y ,%z

Dear all, I am trying to evaluate the optimisation behaviour of a function. Originally I have optimised a model with real data and got a set of parameters. Now I am creating simulated data sets based on these estimates. With these simulations I am estimating the parameters again to see how variable the estimation is. To this end I have written a loop which should generate a new simulated data

Hi, I have two problems regarding the llvm.stackrestore intrinsic. I'm running on 3.0, but a quick test on trunk also showed the same behavior. First problem: --------------- I have code like: tmp1 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp2 = alloca [do some stuff with tmp2] call llvm.stackrestore(tmp1) [some other stuff] tmp3 = call llvm.stacksave() tmp4 = alloca [do some stuff

There is no dedicated instruction for this, so just combine it with the constant offset. Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> Cc: "10.3" <mesa-stable at lists.freedesktop.org> --- This fixes the spec/glsl-1.50/execution/geometry/dynamic_input_array_index piglit test. src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/codegen/nv50_ir_lowering_gm107.cpp | 5 ++++- 1 file changed,

I have been running into difficulties with dispatching on an S4 class defined in the SparseM package, when the method calls are inside a function passed as the f= argument to optimize() in functions in the spdep package. The S4 methods are typically defined as: setMethod("det","matrix.csr", function(x, ...) det(chol(x))^2) that is within setMethod() rather than by name before

Hi, Comments inline. Ben On 18/07/2008 16:30, "Eli Friedman" <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Benedict Gaster > <benedict.gaster at amd.com> wrote: >> Consider the following C code: >> >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) )) float float2; >> typedef __attribute__(( ext_vector_type(2) ))